Exposing the evolution theory. Part 2

The Miserable End of DarwinismMy website, my calculations, my decades long research and study of the very archaic notion of admittedly "mediocre" Charles Darwin, a vile racist, who knew nothing about biochemistry or the compexlty of a simple one-celled organism.

Every word in the website is my personal creation, as I said in the beginning. All of the words are "my own words." There is no point in repeating "my own words" nor in saying what I already said. Just because you can't refute anything there, you have to fall back on your rules which obviously refer to citing websites made by others, not the writer of the post.If anyone does not understand calculating 1/20 raised to the nth power, I cannot explain it to you because your math skills are hopelessly inadequate.The real answer is that Darwin's worshippers simply reject anything contradicting His Gospel - "selection".It is utter magic. Your *scientists* have repeated it so often, you can never change your minds.The number and length of proteins in humans alone is staggering. Why don't you Darwinists suggest how your magic selection picked exactly the correct L-amino acid and formed a peptide bond with precisely the next L-amino acid over and over and over again in that primordial soup.Go ahead. You claim *science* is on your side. Show me some.I'll get my popcorn and cherry coke and wait.

Phat: dead giveaway which I usually observe is that he calls us "Darwinists". Anyone who uses that phrase is likely a YEC and, as you say, has no clue what the actual arguments are. I've always considered myself a Cosmological Creationist which means only that I believe that God initiated the original process. How He did it is above my pay grade. I also do not see why YECs have a problem with Theistic Evolution.---------------------------------------------------------Your "dead giveaway" is of your own making, not mine. If you had read any of Richard Dawkins' books, you would know he spreads the term "Darwinism" very generously, to give credit to the best-known author of selection fairy tales.Darwinism is defined in Wikipedia, Brittanica, Stanford Review, and countless other sources, should anyone care to do a little research before beginning their naive attack.Nor have I so much as mentioned Young Earth Creationism. To pretend that Theistic Evolution is a viable compromise seems to me very wishy-washy and overlooking the insuperable statistics I have already presented, along with the arguments of countless other scientists.Now for the calculations and references:Titin is the largest protein in the human body. It consists of 38,138 amino acid residues in a precise sequence. The first, original synthesis, whether stepwise or in one single, continuous process, consisted of "selecting," in any manner you contemplate, 1 out of the 20 amino acids making up humans, one at a time, 38,138 times in succession. The probability of this event is 1/2038,138 , which equals 1 in 1049,618, times the other factors. The pretense of claiming that "sections" of any protein were "assembled" overlooks the unassailable fact that any "section," however small, had to be assembled under the same statistical constraints. Whether one does the computations in one step or 1,000 steps, the figures are beyond dispute. They get a great deal worse, in fact.Only Levorotary (left-handed) amino acids, not Dextrorotary (right-handed) amino acids are present in human proteins.* So to account for this chirality factor, the first computation of 1 in 10 to the 49,618th power has to be multiplied by 1/2 to the 38,138th power (1 in 10 to the 11,480th power). [Adding exponents is multiplying the numbers they represent.]*Since all protein bonds are peptide bonds, which are equally probable as the random formation of non-peptide bonds, the previous product has to be multiplied by 1/2 to the 38,138th power again. The product of these three essential elements of original Titin synthesis is therefore 1 chance in 10 to the 72,578th power (not even multiplying by whatever is an appropriate probability for the precise folding of the extremely long chain.) [49,618 + 11,480 + 11,480 = 72,578]Finally, "selection," that magic word Darwin so popularized, demands that at each successive naturalistic step, there must be some advantage conferred to the organism, otherwise the random mutation cannot prevail and multiply. It is impossible for anyone to explain how 1072,578 small, individual steps in this original synthesis will each provide separate, useful functions en route to their final complex formula of Titin. Nobody has ever attempted such an explanation, and they probably never will.Titin is one of at least 20,000 proteins* and enzymes in humans, each of which is statistically impossible to originally design without an intelligent creator. * Entry - *188840 - TITIN; TTN - OMIM \So Darwinian evolution, from a single celled organism, to humans, is impossible times at least 20,000.The only rational conclusion is that they are creations of Nature's God, as He is called in our Declaration of Independence.What is a protein? A biologist explains#If the "sections" were pulled from many other functions, as many argue, it still requires new and separate mechanisms for each and every section, and there would have to be many trillions of trillions of them.To avoid the hurdle of 10to the -40, which is evolutionary biologist, Richard Dawkins' definition of "impossible," you have to restrict original polypeptide synthesis to a scant 21 amino acids, calculating chirality and peptide bonding.__________________________________In 1943, the distinguished French mathematician Émile Borel stated that “events with a sufficiently small probability never occur” (Institute of Mathematical Statistics). Dr. Borel chose a fairly safe number, 1 chance in 10 to the 50th power, or 10^-50 .Let’s look at the volume of 10^50 marbles, one centimeter in diameter.There are 100 such marbles per meter, and 100 times 1,000 per kilometer = 10^5 marbles per km .
^
Therefore 10^5 marbles cubed equals 10^15 marbles per cubic kilometer.The volume of earth is 108.3 x 10^10cubic kilometers.10^15marbles/cubic km x 108.3 x 10^10cubic km/earth = 1.083 x 10^27 marbles/earth.10^50 marbles / 1.083 x 10^27 marbles/earth = 9.234 x 10^22 earths filled.This is 923,400 billion billion earth sized spheres filled with marbles, with only one chance to pick the special unique marble on the first and only try. This is the definition of "one chance in..." No probability is ever shown as an infinite number of chances.owlcation.com2 Earth Fact SheetFacts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous HuxleyThis proof appears in my book, Brilliant Creations - The Wonder of Nature and Life. It is available athttps://www.amazon.com/Brilliant Creations________________________The misleading atheist claims that (1) science and religion are mutually exclusive, and (2) Christians are ignorant and anti-science, are both destructive lies which have led millions to abandon their religious faith.Eighty-five percent of Nobel Laureates in the Twentieth Century were Christians and Jews. They were hardly ignorant or unscientific. Modern science accords far better with Nature's God, as He is called in America's Declaration of Independence, than it does with atheist nihilism.___________________________"His (Dawkin’s) metaphor of climbing the mountain (Climbing Mount Improbable, by Richard Dawkins) is loaded with intentionality. No climber ever reached the summit of a high and difficult mountain without a powerful sense of wanting to get there. The very fact that Dawkins admits to aiming for the summit, or in his own words, “only accepting mutations that improve optical performance”, is surely the most blatant admission that his version of neo-Darwinism is, despite claims to the contrary, profoundly goal-centered and purposeful." - How Blind is the Watchmaker, by Neil Broom, page 167Mathematics Professor, John Lennox, gives a fifteen-minute lecture on what he considers the proof of God.Oxford Mathematician DESTROYS Atheism In Less Than 15 Minutes (BRILLIANT!) (youtube.com)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RY8uDhaLJnk"People who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do." - Steve Jobs

dwise1: And again, science enables us to learn so many new things, whereas religion (especially yours) fights against learning anything.____________________________________________In point of irrefutable fact, scientists throughout history have marveled, as did agnostic Carl Sagan, at the wonders surrounding all of us. When any atheist or agnostic expresses wonder, all his acolytes coo and purr. But let any Christian in particular say something of a similar nature, and they are mercilessly maligned for being ignorant.“Astronomical spectroscopy is an almost magical technique. It amazes me still.” - Cosmos, by Carl Sagan, page 93(Refer to P 57 of PBD: Sagan said there is “much poor planning” in the universe, although he did not say where, and how HE would have done it differently.)I wrote to Sagan's publisher, citing many errors and self-contradictions in several of his books I checked out at the library. He wrote me back a letter, ignoring his errors and asked me to buy his newest one.
I never bought a single book he wrote, but did sell his letter on E-Bay for $125.Agnostic Carl's memorial service was held at St. John the Divine Cathedral in New York City.
He is no longer an agnostic.But back to scientists and their motivations. Christians and Jews have always believed in the creative genius of Nature's God, and reasoned that He gave orderliness and coherence to the universe. Accordingly, believers sought to discover knowledge, the Latin term of which is "scientia," the root word for science.For this reason, Christians founded Harvard College, the first university in America and today the most prestigious. Every Ivy League college has a Christian charter and founders.If atheists are so enamored of science and knowledge, why is there no "Atheist University"?Why are there Jewish and Christian and Catholic hospitals across America, but not one Atheist Hospital?
Don't you atheists care about the welfare of your fellow man? No atheist soup kitchens?
No atheist orphanages? How utterly selfish of atheists, as documented in the book by Professor Arthur C. Brooks, "Who Really Cares: "Who Gives and Why It Matters."I read it. I have notes on it, should any Christian care to read some of them.

Taq:​
For the purposes of this thread, let's grant that abiogenesis is impossible. Instead, God created the first life on Earth as a simple prokaryote with the basic genetics and metabolism that is shared by all the life we see now.
​
So exactly what is your objection to the life we see today evolving from that created ancestor?_____________________________________________________________You evolutionists constantly preach your scientific sophistication and brilliance and then you proceed to ask the most absurd, most simplistic and inane questions conceivable.1. A simple prokaryote has NOTHING remotely resembling titin muscle protein inside it, much less 20,000 different proteins found in humans.2. What is inside us is NOT "shared by all the life we see."Those two points should be sufficient to end the debate, but atheists never EVER concede anything except to turn everything over in exactly the opposite direction.3. Humans have at least ten different systems, all essential for life, all interdependent, and all had to be present in the first human, but assuredly not the first prokaryote.4. Your science continues to fail you, but you step around it and make up just-so stories to continue your Darwinian fabrication.